United States v. Embarrato

Second Circuit

United States v. Embarrato

253 F.2d 947

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 17, 1958

DocketNo. 286, Docket 24926

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 253 F.2d 947 (United States v. Embarrato) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Embarrato, 253 F.2d 947 (2d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, being sentenced in 1955 to the minimum mandatory term of five years as a second offender for violation of the narcotics laws, now seeks to vacate his first conviction had on September 9, 1935. On his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) the court accorded him a full hearing of the issue as to his representation by counsel and eventually found that he had been duly represented at the time of his sentence on plea of guilt. There was sharply conflicting evidence, from the defendant himself, the lawyer in question, and a deputy court clerk, together with certain records — all as discussed in Judge Rayfiel’s opinion, D.C.E.D.N.Y., 151 F.Supp. 160. The judge accepted the testimony of the deputy clerk. We find nothing clearly erroneous in this judgment on the facts and accordingly affirm. United States v. Di Martini, 2 Cir., 219 F.2d 807; and see United States v. Di Martini, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 120 F. Supp. 907.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, being sentenced in 1955 to the minimum mandatory term of five years as a second offender for violation of the narcotics laws, now seeks to vacate his first conviction had on September 9, 1935. On his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) the court accorded him a full hearing of the issue as to his representation by counsel and eventually found that he had been duly represented at the time of his sentence on plea of guilt. There was sharply conflicting evidence, from the defendant himself, the lawyer in question, and a deputy court clerk, together with certain records — all as discussed in Judge Rayfiel’s opinion, D.C.E.D.N.Y., 151 F.Supp. 160. The judge accepted the testimony of the deputy clerk. We find nothing clearly erroneous in this judgment on the facts and accordingly affirm. United States v. Di Martini, 2 Cir., 219 F.2d 807; and see United States v. Di Martini, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 120 F. Supp. 907.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 F.2d 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-embarrato-ca2-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack